You need not be surprised, then, at all, at what is said _against_

Abolitionists by the North, for they are wielding a two-edged sword,

which even here, cuts through the _cords of caste_, on the one side, and

the _bonds of interest_ on the other. They are only sharing the fate of

other reformers, abused and reviled whilst they are in the minority; but

they are neither angry nor discouraged by the invective which has been

heaped upon them by slaveholders at the South and their apologists at

the North. They know that when George Fox and William Edmundson were

laboring in behalf of the negroes in the West Indies in 1671 that the

very _same_ slanders were propogated against them, which are _now_

circulated against Abolitionists. Although it was well known that Fox

was the founder of a religious sect which repudiated _all_ war, and

_all_ violence, yet _even he_ was accused of "endeavoring to excite the

slaves to insurrection and of teaching the negroes to cut their master's

throats." And these two men who had their feet shod with the preparation

of the Gospel of Peace, were actually compelled to draw up a formal

declaration that _they were not_ trying to raise a rebellion in

Barbadoes. It is also worthy of remark that these Reformers did not at

this time see the necessity of emancipation under seven years, and their

principal efforts were exerted to persuade the planters of the necessity

of instructing their slaves; but the slaveholder saw then, just what the

slaveholder sees now, that an _enlightened_ population _never_ can be a

_slave_ population, and therefore they passed a law, that negroes should

not even attend the meetings of Friends. Abolitionists know that the

life of Clarkson was sought by slavetraders; and that even Wilberforce

was denounced on the floor of Parliament as a fanatic and a hypocrite by

the present King of England, the very man who, in 1834, set his seal to

that instrument which burst the fetters of eight hundred thousand slaves

in his West India colonies. They know that the first Quaker who bore a

_faithful_ testimony against the sin of slavery was cut off from

religious fellowship with that society. That Quaker was a _woman_. On

her deathbed she sent for the committee who dealt with her--she told

them, the near approach of death had not altered her sentiments on the

subject of slavery and waving her hand towards a very fertile and

beautiful portion of country which lay stretched before her window, she

said with great solemnity, "Friends, the time will come when there will

not be friends enough in all this district to hold one meeting for

worship, and this garden will be turned into a wilderness."

The aged friend, who with tears in his eyes, related this interesting

circumstance to me, remarked, that at that time there were seven

meetings of friends in that part of Virginia, but that when he was there

ten years ago, not a single meeting was held, and the country was

literally a desolation. Soon after her decease, John Woolman began his

labors in our society, and instead of disowning a member for testifying

_against_ slavery, they have for fifty-two years positively forbidden

their members to hold slaves.

Abolitionists understand the slaveholding spirit too well to be

surprised at any thing that has yet happened at the South or the North;

they know that the greater the sin is, which is exposed, the more

violent will be the efforts to blacken the character and impugn the

motives of those who are engaged in bringing to light the hidden things

of darkness. They understand the work of Reform too well to be driven

back by the furious waves of opposition, which are only foaming out

their own shame. They have stood "the world's dread laugh," when only

twelve men formed the first Anti-Slavery Society in Boston in 1831. They

have faced and refuted the calumnies of their enemies, and proved

themselves to be emphatically _peace men_ by _never resisting_ the

violence of mobs, even when driven by them from the temple of God, and

dragged by an infuriated crowd through the streets of the emporium of

New-England, or subjected by _slaveholders_ to the pain of corporal

punishment. "None of these things move them;" and, by the grace of God,

they are determined to persevere in this work of faith and labor of

love: they mean to pray, and preach, and write, and print, until slavery

is completely overthrown, until Babylon is taken up and cast into the

sea, to "be found no more at all." They mean to petition Congress year

after year, until the seat of our government is cleansed from the sinful

traffic of "slaves and the souls of men." Although that august assembly

may be like the unjust judge who "feared not God neither regarded man,"

yet it must yield just as he did, from the power of importunity. Like

the unjust judge, Congress _must_ redress the wrongs of the widow, lest

by the continual coming up of petitions, it be wearied. This will be

striking the dagger into the very heart of the monster, and once 'tis

done, he must soon expire.

Abolitionists have been accused of abusing their Southern brethren. Did

the prophet Isaiah _abuse_ the Jews when he addressed to them the

cutting reproofs contained in the first chapter of his prophecies, and

ended by telling them, they would be _ashamed_ of the oaks they had

desired, and _confounded_ for the garden they had chosen? Did John the

Baptist _abuse_ the Jews when he called them "_a generation of vipers_,"

and warned them "to bring forth fruits meet for repentance?" Did Peter

abuse the Jews when he told them they were the _murderers_ of the Lord

of Glory? Did Paul abuse the Roman Governor when he reasoned before him

of righteousness, temperance, and judgment, so as to send conviction

home to his guilty heart, and cause him to tremble in view of the crimes

he was living in? Surely not. No man will now accuse the prophets and

apostles of _abuse_, but what have Abolitionists done more than they? No

doubt the Jews thought the prophets and apostles in their day, just as

harsh and uncharitable as slaveholders now, think Abolitionists; if they

did not, why did they beat, and stone, and kill them?

Great fault has been found with the prints which have been employed to

expose slavery at the North, but my friends, how could this be done so

effectually in any other way? Until the pictures of the slave's

sufferings were drawn and held up to public gaze, no Northerner had any

idea of the cruelty of the system, it never entered their minds that

such abominations could exist in Christian, Republican America; they

never suspected that many of the _gentlemen_ and _ladies_ who came from

the South to spend the summer months in travelling among them, were

petty tyrants at home. And those who had lived at the South, and came to

reside at the North, were too _ashamed of slavery_ even to speak of it;

the language of their hearts was, "tell it _not_ in Gath, publish it

_not_ in the streets of Askelon;" they saw no use in uncovering the

loathsome body to popular sight, and in hopeless despair, wept in secret

places over the sins of oppression. To such hidden mourners the

formation of Anti-Slavery Societies was as life from the dead, the first

beams of hope which gleamed through the dark clouds of despondency and

grief. Prints were made use of to effect the abolition of the

Inquisition in Spain, and Clarkson employed them when he was laboring to

break up the Slave trade, and English Abolitionists used them just as we

are now doing. They are powerful appeals and have invariably done the

work they were designed to do, and we cannot consent to abandon the use

of these until the _realities_ no longer exist.

With regard to those white men, who, it was said, did try to raise an

insurrection in Mississippi a year ago, and who were stated to be

Abolitionists, none of them were proved to be members of Anti-Slavery

Societies, and it must remain a matter of great doubt whether, even they

were guilty of the crimes alledged against them, because when any

community is thrown into such a panic as to inflict Lynch law upon

accused persons, they cannot be supposed to be capable of judging with

calmness and impartiality. _We know_ that the papers of which the

Charleston mail was robbed, were _not_ insurrectionary, and that they

were _not_ sent to the colored people as was reported. _We know_ that

Amos Dresser was _no insurrectionist_ though he was accused of being so,

and on this false accusation was publicly whipped in Nashville in the

midst of a crowd of infuriated _slaveholders_. Was that young man

disgraced by this infliction of corporal punishment? No more than was

the great apostle of the Gentiles who five times received forty stripes,

save one. Like him, he might have said, "henceforth I bear in my body

the marks of the Lord Jesus," for it was for the _truth's sake, he

suffered_, as much as did the Apostle Paul. Are Nelson, and Garrett, and

Williams, and other Abolitionists who have recently been banished from

Missouri, insurrectionists? _We know_ they are _not_, whatever

slaveholders may choose to call them. The spirit which now asperses the

character of the Abolitionists, is the _very same_ which dressed up the

Christians of Spain in the skins of wild beasts and pictures of devils

when they were led to execution as heretics. Before we condemn

individuals, it is necessary, even in a wicked community, to accuse them

of some crime; hence, when Jezebel wished to compass the death of

Naboth, men of Belial were suborned to bear _false_ witness against him,

and so it was with Stephen, and so it ever has been, and ever will be,

as long as there is any virtue to suffer on the rack, or the gallows.

_False_ witnesses must appear against Abolitionists before they can be

condemned.

I will now say a few words on George Thompson's mission to this country.

This Philanthropist was accused of being a foreign emissary. Were La

Fayette, and Steuben, and De Kalb, foreign emissaries when they came

over to America to fight against the tories, who preferred submitting to

what was termed, "the yoke of servitude," rather than bursting the

fetters which bound them to the mother country? _They_ came with _carnal

weapons_ to engage in _bloody_ conflict against American citizens, and

yet, where do their names stand on the page of History. Among the

honorable, or the low? Thompson came here to war against the giant sin

of slavery, _not_ with the sword and the pistol, but with the smooth

stones of oratory taken from the pure waters of the river of Truth. His

splendid talents and commanding eloquence rendered him a powerful

coadjutor in the Anti-Slavery cause, and in order to neutralize the

effects of these upon his auditors, and rob the poor slave of the

benefits of his labors, his character was defamed, his life was sought,

and he at last driven from our Republic, as a fugitive. But was

_Thompson_ disgraced by all this mean and contemptible and wicked

chicanery and malice? No more than was Paul, when in consequence of a

vision he had seen at Troas, he went over to Macedonia to help the

Christians there, and was beaten and imprisoned, because he cast out a

spirit of divination from a young damsel which had brought much gain to

her masters. Paul was as much a _foreign emissary_ in the Roman colony

of Philippi, as George Thompson was in America, and it was because he

was a _Jew_, and taught customs it was not lawful for them to receive or

observe, being Romans, that the Apostle was thus treated.

It was said, Thompson was a felon, who had fled to this country to

escape transportation to New Holland. Look at him now pouring the

thundering strains of his eloquence, upon crowded audiences in Great

Britain, and see in this a triumphant vindication of his character. And

have the slaveholder, and his obsequious apologist, gained any thing by

all their violence and falsehood? No! for the stone which struck Goliath

of Gath, had already been thrown from the sling. The giant of slavery

who had so proudly defied the armies of the living God, had received his

death-blow before he left our shores. But what is George Thompson doing

there? Is he not now laboring there, as effectually to abolish American

slavery as though he trod our own soil, and lectured to New York or

Boston assemblies? What is he doing there, but constructing a stupendous

dam, which will turn the overwhelming tide of public opinion over the

wheels of that machinery which Abolitionists are working here. He is now

lecturing to _Britons_ on _American Slavery_, to the _subjects_ of a

_King_, on the abject condition of the _slaves of a Republic_. He is

telling them of that mighty confederacy of petty tyrants which extends

ever thirteen States of our Union. He is telling them of the munificent

rewards offered by slaveholders, for the heads of the most distinguished

advocates for freedom in this country. He is moving the British Churches

to send out to the churches of America the most solemn appeals,

reproving, rebuking, and exhorting them with all long suffering and

patience to abandon the sin of slavery immediately. Where then I ask,

will the name of George Thompson stand on the page of History? Among the

honorable, or the base?

What can I say more, my friends, to induce _you_ to set your hands, and

heads, and hearts, to this great work of justice and mercy. Perhaps you

have feared the consequences of immediate Emancipation, and been

frightened by all those dreadful prophecies of rebellion, bloodshed and

murder, which have been uttered. "Let no man deceive you;" they are the

predictions of that same "lying spirit" which spoke through the four

thousand prophets of old, to Ahab king of Israel, urging him on to

destruction. _Slavery_ may produce these horrible scenes if it is

continued five years longer, but Emancipation _never will_.

I can prove the _safety_ of immediate Emancipation by history. In St.

Domingo in 1793 six hundred thousand slaves were set free in a white

population of forty-two thousand. That Island "marched as by enchantment

towards its ancient splendor", cultivation prospered, every day produced

perceptible proofs of its progress, and the negroes all continued

quietly to work on the different plantations, until in 1802, France

determined to reduce these liberated slaves again to bondage. It was at

_this time_ that all those dreadful scenes of cruelty occurred, which we

so often _unjustly_ hear spoken of, as the effects of Abolition. They

were occasioned _not_ by Emancipation, but by the base attempt to fasten

the chains of slavery on the limbs of liberated slaves.

In Guadaloupe eighty-five thousand slaves were freed in a white

population of thirteen thousand. The same prosperous effects followed

manumission here, that had attended it in Hayti, every thing was quiet

until Buonaparte sent out a fleet to reduce these negroes again to

slavery, and in 1802 this institution was re-established in that Island.

In 1834, when Great Britain determined to liberate the slaves in her

West India colonies, and proposed the apprenticeship system; the

planters of Bermuda and Antigua, after having joined the other planters

in their representations of the bloody consequences of Emancipation, in

order if possible to hold back the hand which was offering the boon of

freedom to the poor negro; as soon as they found such falsehoods were

utterly disregarded, and Abolition must take place, came forward

voluntarily, and asked for the compensation which was due to them,

saying, _they preferred immediate emancipation_, and were not afraid of

any insurrection. And how is it with these islands now? They are

decidedly more prosperous than any of those in which the apprenticeship

system was adopted, and England is now trying to abolish that system, so

fully convinced is she that immediate Emancipation is the _safest_ and

the best plan.

And why not try it in the Southern States, if it _never_ has occasioned

rebellion; if _not a drop of blood_ has ever been shed in consequence of

it, though it has been so often tried, why should we suppose it would

produce such disastrous consequences now? "Be not deceived then, God is

not mocked," by such false excuses for not doing justly and loving

mercy. There is nothing to fear from immediate Emancipation, but _every

thing_ from the continuance of slavery.

Sisters in Christ, I have done. As a Southerner, I have felt it was my

duty to address you. I have endeavoured to set before you the exceeding

sinfulness of slavery, and to point you to the example of those noble

women who have been raised up in the church to effect great revolutions,

and to suffer for the truth's sake. I have appealed to your sympathies

as women, to your sense of duty as _Christian women_>. I have attempted

to vindicate the Abolitionists, to prove the entire safety of immediate

Emancipation, and to plead the cause of the poor and oppressed. I have

done--I have sowed the seeds of truth, but I well know, that even if an

Apollos were to follow in my steps to water them, "_God only_ can give

the increase." To Him then who is able to prosper the work of his

servant's hand, I commend this Appeal in fervent prayer, that as he

"hath _chosen the weak things of the world_, to confound the things

which are mighty," so He may cause His blessing, to descend and carry

conviction to the hearts of many Lydias through these speaking pages.

Farewell.--Count me not your "enemy because I have told you the truth,"

but believe me in unfeigned affection,

Your sympathizing Friend,

ANGELINA E. GRIMKÉ.

Published by the American Anti-Slavery Society, corner of Spruce and

Nassau Streets.

THE ANTI-SLAVERY EXAMINER.

* * * * *

VOL. I. SEPTEMBER, 1836. No. 2.

* * * * *

APPEAL

TO THE

CHRISTIAN WOMEN OF THE SOUTH,

BY A.E. GRIMKÉ REVISED AND CORRECTED.

"Then Mordecai commanded to answer Esther, Think not within

thyself that thou shalt escape in the king's house more than all

the Jews. For if thou altogether holdest thy peace at this time,

then shalt there enlargement and deliverance arise to the Jews

from another place: but thou and thy father's house shall be

destroyed: and who knoweth whether thou art come to the kingdom

for such a time as this. And Esther bade them return Mordecai

this answer:--and so will I go in unto the king, which is not

according to law, and _if I perish, I perish_."

Esther IV. 13-16.

RESPECTED FRIENDS,

It is because I feel a deep and tender interest in your present and

eternal welfare that I am willing thus publicly to address you. Some of

you have loved me as a relative, and some have felt bound to me in

Christian sympathy, and Gospel fellowship; and even when compelled by a

strong sense of duty, to break those outward bonds of union which bound

us together as members of the same community, and members of the same

religious denomination, you were generous enough to give me credit, for

sincerity as a Christian, though you believed I had been most strangely

deceived. I thanked you then for your kindness, and I ask you _now_, for

the sake of former confidence, and former friendship, to read the

following pages in the spirit of calm investigation and fervent prayer.

It is because you have known me, that I write thus unto you.

But there are other Christian women scattered over the Southern States,

of whom a very large number have never seen me, and never heard my name,

and feel _no_ personal interest whatever in _me_. But I feel an interest

in _you_, as branches of the same vine from whose root I daily draw the

principle of spiritual vitality--Yes! Sisters in Christ I feel an

interest in _you_, and often has the secret prayer arisen on your

behalf, Lord "open thou their eyes that they may see wondrous things out

of thy Law"--It is then, because I _do feel_ and _do pray_ for you, that

I thus address you upon a subject about which of all others, perhaps you

would rather not hear any thing; but, "would to God ye could bear with

me a little in my folly, and indeed bear with me, for I am jealous over

you with godly jealousy." Be not afraid then to read my appeal; it is

_not_ written in the heat of passion or prejudice, but in that solemn

calmness which is the result of conviction and duty. It is true, I am

going to tell you unwelcome truths, but I mean to speak these _truths in

love_, and remember Solomon says, "faithful are the _wounds_ of a

friend." I do not believe the time has yet come when _Christian women_

"will not endure sound doctrine," even on the subject of Slavery, if it

is spoken to them in tenderness and love, therefore I now address _you_.

* * * * *

POSTAGE.--This periodical contains four and a half sheets. Postage under

100 miles, 6 3-4 cents; over 100 miles, 11 1-4 cents.

_PLEASE READ AND CIRCULATE._

* * * * *

To all of you then, known or unknown, relatives or strangers, (for you

are all _one_ in Christ,) I would speak. I have felt for you at this

time, when unwelcome light is pouring in upon the world on the subject

of slavery; light which even Christians would exclude, if they could,

from our country, or at any rate from the southern portion of it,

saying, as its rays strike the rock bound coasts of New England and

scatter their warmth and radiance over her hills and valleys, and from

thence travel onward over the Palisades of the Hudson, and down the soft

flowing waters of the Delaware and gild the waves of the Potomac,

"hitherto shalt thou come and no further;" I know that even professors

of His name who has been emphatically called the "Light of the world"

would, if they could, build a wall of adamant around the Southern States

whose top might reach unto heaven, in order to shut out the light which

is bounding from mountain to mountain and from the hills to the plains

and valleys beneath, through the vast extent of our Northern States. But

believe me, when I tell you, their attempts will be as utterly fruitless

as were the efforts of the builders of Babel; and why? Because moral,

like natural light, is so extremely subtle in its nature as to overleap

all human barriers, and laugh at the puny efforts of man to control it.

All the excuses and palliations of this system must inevitably be swept

away, just as other "refuges of lies" have been, by the irresistible

torrent of a rectified public opinion. "The _supporters_ of the slave

system," says Jonathan Dymond in his admirable work on the Principles of

Morality, "will _hereafter_ be regarded with the _same_ public feeling,

as he who was an advocate for the slave trade _now_ is." It will be, and

that very soon, clearly perceived and fully acknowledged by all the

virtuous and the candid, that in _principle_ it is as sinful to hold a

human being in bondage who has been born in Carolina, as one who has

been born in Africa. All that sophistry of argument which has been

employed to prove, that although it is sinful to send to Africa to

procure men and women as slaves, who have never been in slavery, that

still, it is not sinful to keep those in bondage who have come down by

inheritance, will be utterly overthrown. We must come back to the good

old doctrine of our forefathers who declared to the world, "this self

evident truth that _all_ men are created equal, and that they have

certain _inalienable_ rights among which are life, _liberty_, and the

pursuit of happiness." It is even a greater absurdity to suppose a man

can be legally born a slave under _our free Republican_ Government, than

under the petty despotisms of barbarian Africa. If then, we have no

right to enslave an African, surely we can have none to enslave an

American; if it is a self evident truth that _all_ men, every where and

of every color are born equal, and have an _inalienable right to

liberty_, then it is equally true that _no_ man can be born a slave, and

no man can ever _rightfully_ be reduced to _involuntary_ bondage and

held as a slave, however fair may be the claim of his master or mistress

through wills and title-deeds.

The Anti-Slavery Examiner, Part 1 of 4 · 第 5 / 59 段